This is an archive of past discussions with User:Dolotta. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold a Arbcom RfC regarding on-wiki harassment. A draft RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC (Draft) and not open to comments from the community yet. Interested editors can comment on the RfC itself on its talk page.
Miscellaneous
The WMF has begun a pilot report of the pages most visited through various social media platforms to help with anti-vandalism and anti-disinformation efforts. The report is updated daily and will be available through the end of May.
Hi, I saw in your bio you said you were interested in the history of Wisconsin municipalities. I'm curious as to where you're from? I live in Weyauwega and would love to help you learn and preserve the history of this area. Boneless pizza123 (talk) 01:10, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
@Dolotta, I really wish you wouldn't take down articles that you don't know anything about. I was just adding to my hometowns page, and those things I added, such as restaurants, don't require source verification. Not cool. LukastheWisconsiniteLukastheWisconsinite (talk) 16:21, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
I want to work up my towns page, and I can do that. It doesn't matter to you, and shouldn't. I took off George, that was just for the memes, but everything else stays. It is cited, and accurate. You don't even live in Jefferson County, so you shouldn't take interest.Besides, the economy section that you revert the page to isn't accurate anymore. Get with the program if you wanna edit this local page.LukastheWisconsinite (talk) 22:54, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
The Wikimedia Foundation announced that they will develop a universal code of conduct for all WMF projects. There is an open local discussion regarding the same.
Arbitration
A motion was passed to enact a 500/30 restriction on articles related to the history of Jews and antisemitism in Poland during World War II (1933–45), including the Holocaust in Poland. Article talk pages where disruption occurs may also be managed with the stated restriction.
@Dolotta , you recently removed a complaint I made against a vandal, citing it as uncivil. I believe this to be an incorrect flag. I would like an explanation. Paulutesch (talk) 16:09, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
@Dolotta , how would you recommend reporting targeted vandalism? I know in the guidelines for civility it says to "assume good faith" but there is plenty of evidence that the user in question has started a campaign against a certain community. I would imagine this is a serious affront to the principles of Wikipedia. Paulutesch (talk) 16:45, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
The Medicine case was closed, with a remedy authorizing standard discretionary sanctions for all discussions about pharmaceutical drug prices and pricing and for edits adding, changing, or removing pharmaceutical drug prices or pricing from articles.
Nice and neutral are not at all the same things. To ignore the white supremacist aspects of Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus Lamar while mentioning all the high-sounding words like "statesman" is decidedly non-neutral. He drafted the incredibly racist Mississippi Secession Ordinance. He was a traitor to the United States who served the confederacy, first as an officer and when he proved unfit, as a diplomat. He was particularly vicious in opposing the rights of African-Americans, especially the right to vote. If describing him as a white supremacist sounds shocking, it should - but it is a neutral point of view. Leaving it out is whitewashing.Jacona (talk) 12:04, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
@Jacona: I agree with you that he is a rather unsavory character. The mention in a location article, however, should be limited to what he is primarily noted for -- in this case, I contend, it is as a justice and member of congress. If a reader would like more information, they can read more in his article, which is where, I believe, any appropriate note of white supremacy should definitely be mentioned. -- Dolotta (talk) 17:56, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
It is also noted that the term white supremacist does not appear anywhere in his article. Why would we put something about a person in a location article that isn't included in their own personal article? -- Dolotta (talk) 18:02, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
His article is full of white supremacy without using the specific term. How would you state that his fortune and his career were based on human slavery and suppression of the rights of black people? Jacona (talk) 18:18, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
My views are similar to that of Magnolia. Most Confederate generals were similarly situated. I am personally fine with some variant of "community XXX, YZ was named after Lucius Lamar." -- Dolotta (talk) 21:38, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
Troy Vollhoffer
Hi @Dolotta, thank you for your help regarding this page! I have proposed edits on the talk page, but I have yet to receive any replies. Did I follow this process correctly? KaitlynHembrook (talk) 19:45, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
@KaitlynHembrook: Yes you did! Thanks. Troy's article is not followed by many people so I would guess nobody noticed it. Since the addition wasn't referenced, it had to be categorically denied. Find a reference, and I will probably let someone take a look at it. You can use the {{Edit fully-protected}} template to have a Wikipedia admin take a look at it. It should get a quicker response. -- Dolotta (talk) 16:16, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
I did let them know on their talk that a rangeblock would be more effective and was about to report the pattern to help an admin (the 6 has been at it since Saturday on a couple other 6's in the range; Saturday they stopped the moment I reported on AIV), which it certainly will be. Nate•(chatter)01:42, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
Sysops will once again be able to view the deleted history of JS/CSS pages; this was restricted to interface administrators when that group was introduced.
Twinkle's block module now includes the ability to note the specific case when applying a discretionary sanctions block and/or template.
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Voting for proposals in the 2021 Community Wishlist Survey, which determines what software the Wikimedia Foundation's Community Tech team will work on next year, will take place from 8 December through 21 December. In particular, there are sections regarding administrators and anti-harassment.
By motion, standard discretionary sanctions have been temporarily authorizedfor all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes). The effectiveness of the discretionary sanctions can be evaluated on the request by any editor after March 1, 2021 (or sooner if for a good reason).
A request for comment is open that proposes a process for the community to revoke administrative permissions. This follows a 2019 RfC in favor of creating one such a policy.
A request for comment is in progress to remove F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a, which covers immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
A request for comment asks if sysops may place the General sanctions/Coronavirus disease 2019 editnotice template on pages in scope that do not have page-specific sanctions?
When blocking an IPv6 address with Twinkle, there is now a checkbox with the option to just block the /64 range. When doing so, you can still leave a block template on the initial, single IP address' talkpage.
When protecting a page with Twinkle, you can now add a note if doing so was in response to a request at WP:RfPP, and even link to the specific revision.
By motion, the discretionary sanctions originally authorized under the GamerGate case are now authorized under a new Gender and sexuality case, with sanctions authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, any gender-related dispute or controversy and associated people. Sanctions issued under GamerGate are now considered Gender and sexuality sanctions.
Following a request for comment, F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a has been deprecated; it covered immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
Following a request for comment, page movers were granted the delete-redirect userright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target.
Technical news
When you move a page that many editors have on their watchlist the history can be split and it might also not be possible to move it again for a while. This is because of a job queue problem. (T278350)
Code to support some very old web browsers is being removed. This could cause issues in those browsers. (T277803)
The user group oversight will be renamed to suppress. This is for technical reasons. You can comment at T112147 if you have objections.
Arbitration
The community consultation on the Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions procedure was closed, and an initial draft based on feedback from the now closed consultation is expected to be released in early June to early July for community review.
Wikimedia previously used the IRC network Freenode. However, due to changes over who controlled the network with reports of a forceful takeover by several ex-staff members, the Wikimedia IRC Group Contacts decided to move to the new Libera Chat network. It has been reported that Wikimedia related channels on Freenode have been forcibly taken over if they pointed members to Libera. There is a migration guide and Wikimedia discussions about this.
Consensus has been reached to delete all books in the book namespace. There was rough consensus that the deleted books should still be available on request at WP:REFUND even after the namespace is removed.
An RfC is open to discuss the next steps following a trial which automatically applied pending changes to TFAs.
Technical news
IP addresses of unregistered users are to be hidden from everyone. There is a rough draft of how IP addresses may be shown to users who need to see them. This currently details allowing administrators, checkusers, stewards and those with a new usergroup to view the full IP address of unregistered users. Editors with at least 500 edits and an account over a year old will be able to see all but the end of the IP address in the proposal. The ability to see the IP addresses hidden behind the mask would be dependent on agreeing to not share the parts of the IP address they can see with those who do not have access to the same information. Accessing part of or the full IP address of a masked editor would also be logged. Comments on the draft are being welcomed at the talk page.
Arbitration
The community authorised COVID-19 general sanctions have been superseded by the COVID-19 discretionary sanctions following a motion at a case request. Alerts given and sanctions placed under the community authorised general sanctions are now considered alerts for and sanctions under the new discretionary sanctions.
